The Pulpit Commentary — Exodus — Volume 2 — Section 76

~ork at home and abroad, and endeavouring to order their prayers with constant reference to the fluctuations in the battle! Moses praying on the hill may remind us of Christ in heaven, interceding for his Church militant on earth. (2) Moses inter- ceded, while holding up in his hands the rod of God (vers. 9, 11). The rod was the symbol of God's power as pledged for the defence of Israel. Faith holds up the rod in laying hold on God's word and promise, and pleading the samo before him. (3) Moses had able coadjutors. Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands when they grew heavy through fatigue (ver. li). It is a happy circumstance when those who bear the principal burden of responsibility in spiritual work can rely on being aided by the sympathy and co-operation of others, "like-minded" (Phil. ii. 20), with themselves in their desire to see God's kingdom making progress. God's people hold up the hands of ministers by -,raying fur them (1 Thess. v. 25). (4) The intercession of Moses had a decisive :nfluence upon the tide of battle. When Moses held up his hands, Israel prevailed; when he let down his hands, Amalek prevailed (ver. 11). His hands being steadily GUpporteJ. till the going down of the sun, Amo.lek was completely discomfited (ver. 13). The letting down of Moses' hands may have been accompanied by a corresponding flagging in the earnestness of his supplications; or it may have been that the outward ar.t, as indicative of the need of sustained and persevering entreaty of God, was itself made essential to the victory. In either case, we have a testimony to the power of prayer. ,vould that the Church were more alive to this secret of gaining victories by earnest supplication! The influence of prayer cannot be overrated. It decides battles. It sways the tides of history. It opens and shuts the windows of heaven (Jas. v. 17, JS). It puts to the rout spiritual enemies. Paul made use of this mighty power (Rom. i. 9, 10; Phil. L 4, 9, etc.). But even Paul did not pray so much as Christ (Matt. riv. 23; Mark i. 35; Luke vi. 12, etc.). 3. Connection with previous miracle. Is it fanciful to trace in the boldness, valour, and spiritual confidence of the Israelites in this battle, some relation to the wonderful deliverance they have just experienced? It was "at Rephidim," the scene of the miraculous supply of water, that the attack of Amalek took place (ver. 8). This water, in the first place, refreshed the Israelites physically, and so enabled them to fight; but we may believe that it had also a powerful, if temporary, effect upon the.ir minds. It would banish doubt, restore trust, inspire enthusiasm. They drank of the brook by the way, and now lifted up the head (Ps. ex. 7). Thus does God time his mercies to our trials, and make the one a preparation for the other. II. THE RECORD IN THE BOOK (ver. 14). This command to insert in II the book" an account of the battle with Amalek was connected : 1. With God's design to give his Church a Bible. A II book" is presupposed, in which, apparently, a journal was kept of the transactions of the march. Such a contemporary record was plainly necessary, if exact accounts of these mighty acts of God in the desert were to be preserved. In no other way could the knowledge of them have been handed down to posterity without distortion, mutilation and adulteration. And God was not giving these mighty revelations of hlmself, to waste them on the air of the wilderness, or to leave them to the risk of being mixed up with legendary matter of man's adding. 'fhis part of Israel's history was being shaped and guided with a view to the instruction of the Church to the end of time (1 Cor. L 6, 11); and it was requisite that a proper account i;hould be kept of its memorable events. Hence the existence of "the book," out of the contents of which, we may believe, these narratives in the book of Exodus are princi- pally compiled. 2. With a special significance attaching to this particular event. Amalek's attack on Israel wa~, as already observed, the first of its kind. "In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world" (Keil). This explains the severe sen1ience pro- nounced upon the tribe, as also the weighty significance attached to this first defeat. It takes many types -c,0 set forth completely the many~sided enmity of the world to God and to his Church. Pharaoh was one type, Amalek 1s another. Pharaoh was more especially the type of the enmity of the world against the _church, _viewed as haviag escaped from its power. Amalek, as Edom afterwards,. 1s peculiarly the type ..:,f vindictive hostility to the kingdom of God as such-of implacable hate. Betweon Amalek (spiritually) and the church, therefore, there can never be aught but warfare. •· Uc,~ause his hand is against the throne of the Lord" (marg.), therefore "the Lord will CH. XVII. 8-IG.] TllE BOOK OF EXODUS. 79